Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Saturday, June 10, 2017

Comey Is Dirty!

New Report Claims More Comey-Lynch Meetings Will Be Revealed

"What's obstruction for the goose is obstruction for the gander."


A new allegation has surfaced that there is more to the connection between former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former FBI Director James Comey than has so far surfaced.
John Solomon, a reporter with Circa, appeared on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show Friday night and offered a prediction of more revelations to come concerning Comey and Lynch.
“I think there is probably more interest that should be focused on what happened between James Comey and Attorney General Loretta Lynch after what we heard (in Comey’s testimony),” Solomon said.
“And I am hearing tonight that Comey may have had other meetings with Lynch that are going to come to light in the next few weeks,” he added.
During his testimony Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey said Lynch gave him a “queasy feeling” when she instructed him which words to use in discussing the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

“At one point, the attorney general had directed me not to call it an investigation, but instead to call it a matter, which confused me and concerned me,” he said.
Lynch’s request “concerned me because that language tracked with how the campaign was talking about how the FBI was doing its work,” Comey said.
“I don’t know whether it was intentional or not, but it gave the impression that the attorney general was trying to align how we describe our work with the Clinton campaign,” he added. “That was one of the bricks in the load that led me to conclude, ‘I have to step away from the department if we’re to close this case credibly.'”
The final blow came when former President Bill Clinton had a surreptitious meeting with Lynch on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport, Comey said.

One analyst said Lynch’s actions represented a “huge mistake” and “a partisan intrusion that must be investigated.”
Lynch “probably changed history by making Comey more skeptical about her and the Clintons’ role,” said Jed Shugerman, a law professor at Fordham University.
“I inferred that it had an effect on Comey that may have changed how he handled the investigation later. She will face very tough questions,” Shugeman said. “And it validates the follow-up questions on the Clinton campaign on their handling the email.”
“We will hear a lot about this,” he added in an email. “It does not rise to obstruction, because it was wording/semantic, not the substance of investigation, but Comey was right to be troubled. Lynch and Bill Clinton should be called to testify and explain their behavior. What’s obstruction for the goose is obstruction for the gander.”
What do you think?

Schneiderman Investigating Eric Trump. Politically Oriented? Ya Betcha

New York’s Attorney General Investigating Eric Trump’s Foundation

"... not only shameful, but ... truly disgusting."


New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is already investigating the Eric Trump Foundation, is now reviewing published allegations that money ostensibly raised for St. Jude’s Children Research Hospital was paid out to several Trump Organization golf courses.
Forbes reported Tuesday that $100,000 in donations meant for St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital went to the Donald J. Trump Foundation.
The report claimed that according to IRS documents, the Eric Trump Foundation in 2012 spent $59,085 on its annual Golf Invitational fundraiser at the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County, N.Y. Those expenses reached $230,080 in 2013 and to $242,294 in 2014, Forbes reported.
The IRS reports do not show how much money went to the Donald J. Trump Foundation or other Trump affiliates. Forbes reported that costs increased when the Trump Organization began charging for the use of its courses.
“I can confirm that our office is looking into issues at the Eric Trump Foundation raised by the Forbes report,” said Eric Soufer, the attorney general’s director of communications.
The Eric Trump Foundation issued a statement in response to the allegations.

“During the past decade, the Eric Trump Foundation has raised over $16.3 million for St. Jude Children’s Research hospital while maintaining an expense ratio of just 12.3 percent,” the statement said.
As reported by Western Journalism, the hospital issued a letter in January confirming the amount donated by Eric Trump’s foundation.
“The Eric Trump Foundation was also responsible for building a $20 million dollar ICU which treats the sickest children anywhere in the world suffering from the most catastrophic terminal illnesses,” the statement added.
“Contrary to recent reports, at no time did the Trump Organization profit in any way from the foundation or any of its activities. While people can disagree on political issues, to infer malicious intent on a charity that has changed so many lives is not only shameful, but is truly disgusting. At the end of the day, the only people who lose are the children of St. Jude and other incredibly worthy causes,” the statement said.

“The foundation intends to cooperate fully with the attorney general’s review, and looks forward to a productive and open dialogue with the attorney general’s office to address any questions it may have,” it added in a separate statement
Schneiderman, a critic of President Donald Trump, has launched a number of investigations into the activities of various Trump family foundations based in New York State. Late last year, Eric Trump said he would shutter his foundation, but Schneiderman said that could not be done until his office completed an investigation into its activities.
Eric Trump stopped all direct fundraising efforts of the charity in the wake of his father’s election.
A statement on the charity’s website stated that “the foundation is being restructured and renamed, and under new leadership, it will continue its mission to support St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in the fight against pediatric cancer.”
What do you think about this investigation? 

Trump Needs To Be More Forthcoming

Here's What Trump Should Say To End The Comey-Mania

Win McNamee/Getty ImagesU.S. President Donald Trump announces his decision for the United States to pull out of the Paris climate agreement in the Rose Garden at the White House June 1, 2017 in Washington, DC.
After fired FBI director James Comey’s much-ballyhooed testimony before the
Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday, President Trump could come away
 feeling vindicated in two key respects. First, Comey acknowledged that Trump
never attempted to impede the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016
election; second, Comey admitted that Trump was not under personal
 investigation. In two other, more minor respects, the Comey hearing was a
winner for Trump, too: first, Comey acknowledged that Loretta Lynch improperly

intervened in the Hillary investigation; second, Comey said that he had leaked
material to the press, undermining his own credibility in some ways.
All of which could add up to a relatively solid defense for Trump, despite
Comey’s allegations that Trump wanted to establish a “patronage” relationship
 with Comey and said he “hoped” Comey could find a way to let former National
 Security Advisor Mike Flynn off the hook.
That defense would look something like this:
I did not collude with Russia during the 2016 election. I have said that all along, and Comey confirmed that there is no evidence to suggest collusion by me; he even admitted, finally, that I was not under personal investigation. He told me that privately, but wouldn’t say it publicly, which upset me. That’s the real reason I fired him — out of anger that I wasn’t being exonerated in the public view, despite Comey knowing full well that I was not under investigation.
Furthermore, I didn’t obstruct any investigation. Comey admits I never tried to obstruct the Russia investigation; he even admits that I said he should check out my “satellite” associates regarding Russia. As far as my comments on General Flynn, they were merely hot-headed statements about my hopes — I know and like General Flynn, as does Comey. I’m not interested in protecting Flynn if he’s guilty of something. But we still have no evidence that beyond Flynn lying to Mike Pence about his phone calls to the Russians — phone calls that have not been shown to be anything but within legal bounds — anything was done that was wrong, in my opinion. I hoped Comey would feel the same way and bring the investigation to what I felt was a just conclusion, but I never instructed him to kill the investigation outright.
Actually, Comey knows that I didn’t obstruct his Flynn investigation. He said in his testimony that all investigations moved forward smoothly. If Comey thought I was obstructing his exercise of his duty, he should have quit or said something. He didn’t — not to me, not to Attorney General Sessions, not to anyone.
Look, I know I should have had patience with the process. But I’m not by nature a patient man. I want to get things done, and the cloud hanging over my administration thanks to Democratic scandalmongering has hampered my ability to pursue policies to help the American people. Calling my actions obstruction — without any evidence of an underlying crime — is nasty.
So let’s get back to work. I’ll try to contain my impatience with a process that simply doesn’t exist in the private sector, where we’re judged on whether we perform or not, not on what people say about us. And all of my Democratic colleagues should stop trying to oust me out of loyalty to Hillary Clinton, and start trying to focus on helping me help Americans.
That’s what Trump could say.
Instead, he’s sent out his lawyer to deny the key components of Comey’s account.
 This sets up an open conflict in credibility between Trump and Comey, and that’s
 no good for Trump. Trump would be wise to acknowledge his personal faults
while pointing out that there is no real case against him outside of those faults.
But that would take humility — and, dare I say it? — a bit of 4D chess. 

Muslim Activist Believes She Is Black Before Being American

Tucker Slams Activists Who Backs Taxpayer-Funded Muslim “Safe Spaces”

That’s precisely what Blair Imani wants. She’s an American activist who thinks it would be a good idea for the Australian government to fund such spaces. Not only that, she thinks it would be a good idea if such safe spaces were exported to America, as she explained on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show Friday.
While noting that recent terror attacks in Europe may indicate Islamist terror is hazardous to one’s health, Carlson said that “in Australia, it is Muslims who are declaiming they’re the ones who need safe spaces.”
“A group called the Islamic Council of Victoria, which says it represents 200,000 Muslims in Australia, is calling on the government there to fund a series of safe spaces, where they say Muslims can safely express — this is a quote — ‘inflammatory views that would cause trouble if voiced publicly.'”
Imani, executive director of New York-based Equality for HER, told Carlson the United States should have such taxpayer-funded “safe spaces,” too. Except she tried to make it sound a little less “inflammatory.”

“I’m talking about safe spaces being somewhere where you can be who you are without fear of being surveilled, having violence committed against you or being harassed,” she said. “And I think it’s a good idea to have everywhere.”
Imani was then asked why she believed Muslims under suspicion by some governments. She didn’t skirt the obvious:
“There are acts of terror committed in the name of Allah,” she said.
Carlson said that keeping society safe from Islamist extremism shouldn’t be compromised just because activist groups want “safe spaces” to be paid for by the government.

“This is a real thing,” Carlson said. “And I don’t understand why groups like yours won’t acknowledge the reality of that, because it is there, it’s true.”
The fact that we’re even having this discussion — that extremists should have a “safe space” paid for by the government — indicates just how ridiculous things are in 2017. Let’s hope our government — and any government — refuses to pay for such a ridiculous plan.
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree.
What are your thoughts on these "safe spaces"?

Chelsea Clinton Is Such A Lightweight, Uninformed, Spoiled and Privileged Political Hack

Chelsea Clinton tries to bash Republicans in tweet — but actually destroys Michelle Obama instead


Chelsea Clinton tries to bash Republicans in tweet — but actually destroys Michelle Obama instead
In a recent tweet, Chelsea Clinton tried to slam Republicans, but instead ripped Michelle Obama. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Chelsea Clinton, daughter of former President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, inadvertently ripped former first lady Michelle Obama recently on Twitter.
Clinton took to Twitter this week to comment on a recent study that showed that kids in school learn better, are more attentive and better retain what they learn when they’re not hungry and eat nutritional food.
“Research again confirms kids pay more attention in class & better retain what they’re taught when they’re not hungry,” Clinton wrote.

When one Twitter user replied and said the study’s results were obvious, Clinton used the opportunity to bash Republicans, writing that Republicans have been trying to repeal free lunches and block nutritional food requirements.
“Sadly, many Republicans continue to argue against free school lunches & breakfasts & against nutritional support for families,” Clinton wrote.

@ChelseaClinton It doesn't seem like this is an idea that needs research. 
@allqwackedup Agreed. Sadly, many Republicans continue to argue against free school lunches & breakfasts & against nutritional support for families

Though she was obviously trying to bash Republicans, Clinton ended up bashing Michelle Obama. That’s because while her husband was president, Obama worked to completely overhaul the national school lunch program while expanding the free and reduced lunch program.
Indeed, the Obama administration was successful in overhauling the program. However, the changes they implemented were not popular and students across the country for years have taken to social media to post the unappetizing and small lunches they now receive at school all thanks to the changes Obama made.
Many people took to Twitter to note Clinton’s apparent slam of Obama:

@ChelseaClinton So then you opposed @MichelleObama's school lunch program, which perpetually left kids hungry, correct?

@ChelseaClinton Maybe you should talk to Michelle Obama about wasted school lunches before blaming Republicans

@ChelseaClinton @nytimes duh, no kidding. they'll be smarter now that they'll get lunches they can actually eat. unlike crap under Obama

@ChelseaClinton It would help if these Michele Obama "free" lunches didn't look & taste like cardboard. Is research necessary when common sense is needed?

@ChelseaClinton Well, if Michelle Obama hadn't ruined school lunch our kids would all be much better off! Thanks for making that point!

President Donald Trump’s administration has already announced plans to rollback many of the school lunch nutritional requirements implemented by the Obamas.